Take action for Liberty each and every day.
Support an open press. Teknosis' continued operation and existence crucially depends on your informative contributions, donation or paying forward, partnering with or purchase of items advertised here. Thank you.

Vitamin consumers in the US and Canada can
breathe a bit easier today, but we cannot ease
up!

Our pressure is
working!C-51 is not on the Order
Paper for the coming week, (the last week before
Parliament goes out for the summer, they'll be back in October.) In all
likelihood, the Canadian government's strategy re C-51 will be to let it
die with this Parliament, then attempt to bring it back under a
different bill after the election, which will most likely be in
October. (With all this heat over C-51 the Conservatives are very unlikely
to call an election before then.)

What CTV did not announce but
which we know to be true is that this announcement came as a result of an
UPRISING against Clement by a group of
50 Conservative MPs who stormed into his office
on Wednesday to read him the RIOT
ACT over C-51 because they're getting so much
HEAT from angry constituents who are foaming at
the mouth and ready to burn Ottawa to the
ground!

I have just confirmed
this from a conversation with Tony Stephan at Truehope Inc. who has
confirmed that the information contained in the following
email that was forwarded to me by someone in the UK is
true! (I have removed the name of the person who sent it for that
person's protection, and have made one change to the information to protect
the source in Parliament who leaked this to
us.):

Hello,

We
seem to be winning this one. I have this from the horse's mouthand will only tell you over phone who told me
this:

Wednesday around lunch
time, shortly after Clement's CBCradio appearance no less than 50
(!!!) Conservative MP's ran as agroup into Tony Clement's Parliament
Hill office and tore a stripoff him after his interview by Anna-Maria
Tremonti. They yelled athim because, as one told him, he had received
about 50,000 calls -not a biblical number, he said it was a
rough count: his officefroze as nothing worked anymore due to those
many e-mails and faxesas well as unannounced visits from people re
C-51. They (not thePM) demanded his resignation which he handed to
the PM that samenight. They also went to the PM's office, who is not
used to beingtreated that way, and gave him hell, threatening to have
a changeof leader, no less.

In
my view this means "full steam ahead" to ensure that C-52 stopsas
well, as it is the more dangerous of the
two.

WHATS NEXT: WHY WE MUST KEEP
THE PRESSURE ON!!

Last week www.stopc51.com was hacked by someone
trying to stop our efforts and two internal files were stolen forcing site
admins to have to recreate all their internal links. They also were forced
by enormous traffic to the site (over 2.5 million visitors), to relocate
the site to a different server. The site was hacked because it is causing
enormous problems for the ruling elite who seek to kill large numbers of us
by blocking our access to micronutrients.

If you go to http://stopc51.com/c51WhatMPsSaid/index.html you
will see that we're just starting to create a spread sheet showing the
positions of every member of the Canadian Parliament on C-51. We will have
this completed as a voting guide in time for the next election in October.
Any MP who fails to back away from C-51 will have committed political
suicide and will be ridden out on a rail, because we intend to keep
increasing the size of our grass roots rebellion over the summer (while the
ruling elite are hoping we'll "go away".)

We're
going to continue putting so much heat on this issue of consumer access to
natural health products that after we're done reading the riot act to
members of Parliament, we'll THEN take the NEXT steps to identifying
members of Health Canada who we must ALSO get rid of since they're the ones
really behind C-51 and C-52 in the FIRST
place!

We're going to force Parliament to make
the CHANGES to the Food and Drug Act that we need so they don't continue
blocking NHPs from being brought to market the way they are now. Here you
can see that Clement and Health Canada are responsible for driving several
Canadians to suicide when they blocked their access to Empower Plus http://stopc51.com/c51WhatMPsSaid/index.html

By
continuing to build our grass roots base, and by continuing to pound the
Canadian Parliament and the US Congress on health freedom issues, we intend
to secure our freedom against this tyranny, not only today, but for
generations to come!

Its
very important that health freedom fighters around the world connect the
dots on whats happening, how and why its happening because it doesn't
matter anymore what country we live in, we must join forces internationally
against the ruling elite's efforts to block our access to healing
nutrients.

The Ruling Elite want to block
our access to healing nutrients via the UN's Codex Alimentarius Commission
and related harmonization efforts for the following
reasons:

The late Jacques
Cousteau, a famed advocate for the oceans and the environment, was quoted
in a November 1991 UNESCO Courier saying, "One American burdens the earth
much more than twenty Bangladeshis. This is a terrible thing to say. In
order to stabilize world populations, we must eliminate 350,000 people per
day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it's just as bad not to say it." http://www.davidicke.com/content/view/34/26/

3.
They have an agenda to force us into a psychocivilized society with
everyone to be put under electronic mind control and specific
micronutrients interfere with both implanted microchips and with directed
energy in the form of microwaves.

As incredible
as this may seem to believe, by just doing some reading, you can readily
see that its true. John Mecca built this site in an effort to warn us http://www.us-government-torture.com
John had some patents that were of interest to the US Department of
Defense, so they stole them. When he attempted to retaliate, they sent
goons to his house who drugged him and implanted him with microchips. When
he started finding ways to thwart their efforts, they next started
attempting to control him using microwaves, but he started discovering
countermeasures to that too- all of which he reveals on his site. He
discovered that certain specific micronutrients interfere with their
control efforts.

In addition to his site, also
see http://www.mk-resistance.com/ ,
http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/akwei.htm and
http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/
Grasp that the ruling elite have the technology waiting in the wings to
literally be able to see through our eyes, hear through our ears, put
thoughts directly into our minds, and to induce heart attacks and strokes
any time a monitoring computer program has decided we've stepped over
certain lines they don't want crossed, and controlling our access to
specific micronutrients figures heavily into this
equation.

Once this information gets spread
widely enough, the 100th monkey syndrome will kick in heavily and the
ruling elite won't have a chance to foist scams such as C-51 or anything
related through on us, but we're going to have to continue to put the
pressure on, and with your ongoing help, IAHF will be able to do this more
than we have EVER been!

Help Us Take The Infowar To The Next Level This Saturday

Saturday is the big day - the day when you can make a statement and pledge your support for one of the most exciting and ambitious developments that the alternative media has ever undertaken, by participating in the Infowars Money Bomb.

Alex Jones here to inform you that, thanks to you, the Infowars Money Bomb is a huge success.

In the first twelve hours, the money bomb has raised more than $80,000. This is important for so many reasons.

I want to personally invite you to join me tonight for a
webcast-only radio show from 8pm-midnight central time. We have a
bunch of special guests lined up and we will be taking your calls as we
all track the final hours of the money bomb together.

From the bottom of my heart, I want to thank all of you who have
supported us in the past and those who have contributed to the money
bomb. I want to encourage those of you who are on the fence to donate,
even if it's just five dollars, so that you can be part of this
historic event.

Some of you may not be aware of what we are planning to do with the
funds that are being graceously given to us. I invite you to click the
link below to get the full story.

Ron Paul 2008: More Powerful Aspects of the Freedom Revolution

Learning about & spreading Constitutional principles is what Ron
Paul’s message is all about. Anything supporting that message by
default then, supports Ron Paul. A major unalienable Constitutional right
we have is the Right to Redress Grievances. Seems this overlooked right
is extremely powerful. Click the links in order presented below &
listen to Bob Schulz explain it & how he’s using it against our
intolerant Big Brother.

I N C R E D I B L E Q U O TE: "[W]hen a long train of abuses and usurpations,
pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under
absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such
government, and to provide new guards for their future security." (The United States of America’s Declaration
of Independence, Dec. 1776) [Principles many of you fought for.

Killer information: Visit http://www.wtprn.com/listen.shtml &
listen to We The People Radio Network.
Once there, click the 'Listen Now'
button on one of the three
streams available. It's great FREE radio! Learn
about your true power here. (Please. . .Take the time to figure out how
to download the stream; it really isn’t that difficult (play w/
possibilities if necessary—you’ll be glad you did—what
information(!)).)

Rediscover our state Sovereign Roots- Was the Hurricane Katrina
aftermath of destruction the Obligation of protection, defense and
REMEDY to the People, the Sovereign or the Subject's? The Grantor or
the Grantee's? The Principal or the Agent's? The Master or the
Servant's? <http://dayspringgatheringscircle.org/OurSovereignRoots/?p=28>

An Historical Record Knowledge UPDATE and No Cost Downloads for further private research and self - inquiry.

We can learn from history how past generations thought and acted,
how they responded to the demands of their time and how they solved
their problems. We can learn by analogy, not by example, for our
circumstances will always be different than theirs were. The main thing
history can teach us is that human actions have consequences and that
certain choices, once made, cannot be undone. They foreclose the
possibility of making other choices and thus they determine future
events. Our ignorance of history causes us to slander our own times.
Flaubert

The
liberticides of American pretend that keeping up the "form" satisfies
the obligation. So they rule states from Washington, while keeping up
simulacra for republican governments. All will admit that a monarchical
form means a monarchy; an aristocratic form an aristocracy; and a
"republican form a republic."

Washington, Franklin, and all the founding fathers considered and
called the present federal system an experiment. Indeed, all human
systems must be such, owing to the finite wisdom which makes them. This
is why Massachusetts and other states declare, what indeed makes
common-sense teaches: that "that the people alone have an incontestable
inalienable and indefeasible right to institute government, and to
reform, alter, or totally change the same when their protection,
safety, prosperity, and happiness require it."

Dedicated to all living souls of human civilization, who have dared
to yearn, breath, serve and sacrifice for Liberty and Peace, past and
present.

The True Character of the Government—By the action of
their wills, the states give existence, life, and power to the visible
government, and at the same time, and in the same act, they federalize
themselves. No possible political will could delegate or grant, but
that of the state, while the only possible grantee is the federation of
states. "The government"—is so called—cannot have any capacity to be a
grantee, for decisive reasons which will now be presented.

"The government of the united states," like that of any state, is
tripartite, i.e. three institutions, co-existing, but independently
acting. It was not constituted a unit, so as to be a moral person, with
a mind and a will. The "unity of government" which Washington spoke of,
simply meant one system for all the states—without reference to its
character—which should effectually provide for the "common-defence" and
"general welfare" of "the people" as organized.

To get a definite conception of the system, let us see how distinct
and exclusive these institutions appear in the federal pact. Article
I.united states;" Article II. declares that "the executive power shall
be vested in a president of the united states;" and Article III.
declares "the judicial power of the united states shall be vested in
one supreme court" and subordinate courts. declares that "all
legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the

The founding fathers of institutional liberty, knowing the tendency
of all government towards tyranny, recognized this natural separateness
of these governmental functions and agencies, and in some constitutions
expressed and carefully guarded it. [ See the constitution of
Massachusetts.] Their aim, especially in forming the federal
government, was to subject every measure of the rulers to several
successive and independent examinations, tests and vetoes, so as to
ensure the wisest and most efficient, and at the same time the most
conservative, efforts to secure "tranquillity," "justice," "defence,"
"welfare," and "liberty," and, above all, to prevent the injury or
destruction of the great palladium of all these blessings—the American
constitutional polity. This is precisely the theory of those "checks
and balances" so many talk of, and so few seem to understand and
properly appreciate.

The three agencies under review are the mere mouthpieces,
instruments, tools, or slaves of their creator, owner, master, and
sovereign—the league of commonwealths, "the united states," "the
people"—to speak and effectuate the legislative, executive, or judicial
will, as the case may be, of the said sovereignty.

The Unheeded Form of Consolidation is the Worst—Now the most
dangerous form of consolidation in America is that which is least
noticed and guarded against, and that is the breaking down, by these
agencies, of the walls separating them; their getting together and
acting covertly with one mind, under the greatest temptations, without
check and without responsibility; or what amounts to the same, the
gradual gaining by one of them of a mastery over the others, so as to
get undivided sway. In either case "the government" becomes a unit, and
a corporate despot of the vilest imaginable character. If it did not,
it would be superhuman.

Reasons why it cannot be a Grantee—The only seat of that "endowment
of the soul" called "will," which must be used in government, is in
"the people" as organized, and "it never leaves them."

Their right of freely exercising it, is sovereignty.

Not
only is this "the faculty of the soul" resident in the people, but the
government has no will, because it has no unity, and no corporate mind.
Hence it cannot be a grantee of powers, rights, or anything else; but
its capacity is simply that of an agent, or trio of agents, who hold
nothing of right, must do as told, and remain abjectly submissive, so
that without resistance, or even murmur, it, or they, can be kicked out
of the way whenever the mighty mind of the people shall move their
mighty foot to that end.[1] <../../../../../American
-Citizens-for-Truth/post

Again, "the government" is never mentioned as grantee, while the
association called "the united states" always is. All titles to federal
property, and to the occupation, use and jurisdiction of federal
footholds—as have been shown—are made by the respective states, and to
the "united states." Nay, more, the tenth amendment declares expressly
that all the powers in the constitution are "delegated to the united
states."

Again, there is no grant whatever in the sense of alienation; but
powers are delegated, i.e. entrusted to be used for the owners, "the
people"—the users necessarily being "agents" and "servants" and
"subjects."

The expounding words "cede," "surrender," "part with,"
"relinquish," etc., that mean alienate, are quibbles, subterfuges, and
fallacies; and they found in the writings of every "expounder."

Again, the language of the pact shows everything still to belong to
the states. Note the numerous possessive phrases—"the government of the
* states;" "the territory and other property of the * states," etc.

Again, the government could not be the grantee, because it did not
have a being till long after the constitution had been completed by the
only parties that then existed, or could exert will upon it, and the
association of states had been, ipso facto, formed.

In the fall of 1788, the congress of states declared the new
federalizing instrument to be complete, according to its tenor, by "
the ratification of the convention of nine states..between the states
so [i.e. by conventions] ratifying the same;" and the said congress
provided for carrying it into effect, by notifying their constituents,
the states, of the "sufficient" "establishment," and recommending that
they should elect their government. Whereupon the respective state
legislatures passed laws for elections.

In accordance therewith, the states elected THEIR OWN SUBJECTS as
senators; THEIR OWN SUBJECTS as representatives; THEIR OWN SUBJECTS as
electors to elect the president. And when, in the spring of 1789, the
elected persons, AS SUBJECTS, representatives, and agents under the
law, had organized themselves to work in the vocation whereunto called,
the government for the first time existed; and, as I have shown, it had
no unity of body or mind, no will, no inherent and original rights and
powers, but was composed entirely of SUBJECTS AND AGENTS who remained
individually and collectively under the law, whether home or general,
constitutional or statutory.

What! are these mighty "government" men under state constitutions
and laws? Yes, verily, even under the laws of town councils, if
applicable. Let the president, or all his government, go into
Gettysburg and violate an ordinance, and he would learn the fact. The
wills of the states have declared the federal law to be supreme.

What conflicts is no law. What does not conflict is law, and
binding even on the proudest magnate or corporation in the land,
whether governmental or not.

How then could this poor agency,
instrument, or machine, be a party to the compact, and the grantee of
delegations, of federal tenures of property, and the use and occupation
of sites for forts, navy-yards, etc.? The idea is absurd.

It was the league or federation that was grantee. Each state
granted to the states, as is proved by the tenth amendment, providing
that all powers not delegated to the united states, are reserved. And,
I repeat, every grant was a delegation or giving in trust, and not an
alienation.

As Judge Parsons said, "The people divest themselves of nothing."
Said Judge Marshall, in the ratifying convention of Virginia: "Federal
and state officers are alike servants of the people, who hold their
powers in their own hands, and delegate them cautiously for short
periods, to their servants, who are accountable for the SMALLEST
MALADMINISTRATION." [II. Ell. Deb. 89; III. Ibid. 232.] [Italics and
Bold, mine.]

A Misleading Misnomer—The phrase, "the government"—particularly
when the big G is used—misleads the unthinking, unless the purely
derivative, delegative, and agential character of the institution so
named, is kept in view; for the real government of the republic, or of
any republic, is necessarily the state itself—the so called government
being a mere agency or commission, created by the people, and empowered
by them to adminster their governmental affairs.

The American bodies-politic govern themselves—separately in
domestic, and unitedly in general affairs. They, then, are the
government.

Hence it is that the first article of the
constitution, as unanimously adopted by the convention of 1787, and
never reconsidered, though left out by the revising committee, reads as
follows: "Article I. The style of this government shall be the United
States." "The government," then, is "the United States." And, in the
nature of things, the government of each republic is the republic
itself, while the government of the united republics is the united
republics themselves.

Let us Symbolize the Polity—The whole subject, then, in all its
parts, being matter of fact or inference, we can present the grades and
impartations of authority.

1. Suppose thirteen or more figures
in a horizontal line to symbolize the organizations of people named in
the constitution, and those since admitted. Part of the people were
named Massachusetts; part Delaware; part Georgia; and so of the rest.
The original commonwealths are still so named, and are unchanged; and
the new ones are their political equals.

2. Next below, suppose the same figures to be grouped as the united
states, and a line to be drawn from each of the above states to this
association, to indicate the delegating of power, by each state, to the
union of them. Each state is the delegator, and all of them united are
the delegatee.

3. In the third grade, let us suppose a three fold figure to
represent the three co-ordinate institutions which form the federal
agency of government, through which the individual people are ruled.
This figure shows, "the government of [i.e. belonging to] the united
states," subordinate to the said states, of course.

4. At the bottom we might place a figure to represent the same
people that we see atop, but in their capacity AS SUBJECTS, the
republican idea of self-government requiring that while they appear at
the top, and above the institutious of government, in a corporate and
sovereign capacity, they should also appear below the said institutions
in an individual and subject one.

This process will lastingly impress the reader with the grades of
our system—1. the sovereign societies of people associated; 2. their
governmental "agents and depositaries of power," as Mr. Curtis calls
them—the congress, the president, and judiciary; 3. the members,
citizens, or subjects of the states, and their belongings. The first
are the sovereign people, the last the subject people.

Facts Must Prevail—Unless we wish plain facts of history and the
sacred records of our country to be subjects of contention forever, we
must make up distinct issues, and charge either the sons or the sires
with deliberate falsehood.

Let those who Devised described the Polity—The sires who planned,
our constitution of general government described it as follows. Apology
for the repetition can hardly be necessary—

ALEXANDER HAMILTON
said the present union is "an association of states or confederacy;"
and that "the people of New York are the sovereigns of it" [Fed. IX.;
his address, 1789].

CHANCELLOR LIVINGSTON said our general polity is a "league of states" [II. Ell. Deb. 274].

JOHN JAY said "the states adopted" "the present plan;" and that it is a "union of states" {I. Ell. Deb. 496; II. Ibid. 282].

JAMES MADISON said "the states are regarded as distinct and independent sovereigns" "by the constitution" [Fed. XL.]

GENERAL
WASHINGTON wrote of the constitution as a "compact or treaty;" and the
union formed by it as " the new confederacy" [Letter to Gen. Pinckney,
June 28, 1788; do. To. D. Stuart, Oct. 17, 1787].

DR. FRANKLIN said the senate was to secure in the union "the sovereignties of the individual states" [V. Ell. Deb. 266].

JAMES
WILSON said the sovereignty "is in the people before they make a
constitution, and remains in them after it is made," and that the said
people are "thirteen independent sovereignties" [II. Ell. Deb. 443;
Mass. Centinel, Oct. 24, 1787].

JOHN DICKINSON called the new political system " a confederacy of
republics," and he recognized therein "the sovereignty of each state"
[II. Pol. Writings of J.D., 107].

GOUVERNER MORRIS said the
constitution was " a compact..between political societies,…each
enjoying sovereign power" [III. Life of M., 193].

ROGER SHERMAN said "the government….was instituted by a number of
sovereign states" [see his letter to John Adams in VII. Writings of
J.A.].

TENCH COXE said the union was of "separate sovereignties, joining in a confederacy" [Am. Mus. 160, 244].

CHANCELLOR
PENDLETON, the president of the Virginia ratifying convention, said the
people of Virginia were "the fountain of all power," and the new system
was "uniting the strength of thirteen states," each state " a sovereign
state" [III. Ell. Deb. 297, 549].

JOHN MARSHALL (afterwards chief justice) spoke of the state in the union as "the sovereign power" [III. Ell. Deb. 555].

SAMUEL ADAMS said "each state retains its sovereignty" in the present union. [II. Ell. Deb. 131].

GOVERNOR JAMES BOWDOIN spoke of the union as " a confederacy;" and
of the states as "distinct sovereignties" [II. Ell. Deb. 129]. See also
the same effect, the utterances of JAMES IREDELL [IV. Ell. Deb. 133];
FISHER AMES [II. Ell. Deb. 46]; THEOPHILUS PARSONS [see his Life, p.
98]; CHRISTOPHER GORE [II. Ell. Deb. 18]; GEORGE CABOT [II. Ell. Deb.
26].

The founding fathers then, describe the American political system as a federation of sovereignties.

[1] <../../../../../American-Citizens-for-Truth/messages%3fo%3d1%26yguid%3d2\
08120019&use_rte=1#_ftnref1> The federal supreme court said "
the constitution was written by the mighty hand of the people.? Why
then can they not have and use a mighty foot?

To be continued……………..

Audere est facere, Veritas odit moras

Vitam impendere vero

Gabriel Paul

Open Air Chemical & Biological Testing on private

American inhabitants, Legal without YOUR FULLY INFORMED CONSENT!

If you find the law as it stands for legal sanctioned governmental
genocide an outrage and/or a complete violation of human liberties,
please DO spread it forward, thank you.

Next,
shouldn't we ask ourselves, does ANY matter of activism we pursue,
political, environmental, social, religious, tax, legal, civil,
immigration, etc., EVEN matter if American families inherent liberty to
LIFE without trespass and violation without REMEDY, upon the soil of
your State, is being destroyed, lawfully, by a federal government?

Democrat, Republican, Independent, Green, Yellow, Purple or Black,
how can it even begin to matter, when all of the above ordain and
sanction genocidal Law as below?

(1) any test or experiment involving the use of a chemical agent or biological agent on a civilian population; or

(2) any other testing of a chemical agent or biological agent on human subjects.

(b) Exceptions

Subject
to subsections (c), (d), and (e) of this section, the prohibition in
subsection (a) of this section does not apply to a test or experiment
carried out for any of the following purposes:

(1) Any peaceful purpose that is related to a medical, therapeutic,
pharmaceutical, agricultural, industrial, or research activity.

(2) Any purpose that is directly related to protection against toxic chemicals or biological weapons and agents.

(3) Any law enforcement purpose, including any purpose related to riot control.

(c) Informed consent required

The
Secretary of Defense may conduct a test or experiment described in
subsection (b) of this section only if informed consent to the testing
was obtained from each human subject in advance of the testing on that
subject.

(d) Prior notice to Congress

Not later than 30 days after
the date of final approval within the Department of Defense of plans
for any experiment or study to be conducted by the Department of
Defense (whether directly or under contract) involving the use of human
subjects for the testing of a chemical agent or a biological agent, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of
the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives a report setting forth a full accounting of those
plans, and the experiment or study may then be conducted only after the
end of the 30-day period beginning on the date such report is received
by those committees.

(e) "Biological agent" defined

In this section, the term
"biological agent" means any micro-organism (including bacteria,
viruses, fungi, rickettsiac, or protozoa), pathogen, or infectious
substance, and any naturally occurring, bioengineered, or synthesized
component of any such micro-organism, pathogen, or infectious
substance, whatever its origin or method of production, that is capable
of causing—

(1) death, disease, or other biological malfunction in a human, an animal, a plant, or another living organism;

(2) deterioration of food, water, equipment, supplies, or materials of any kind; or

(3) deleterious alteration of the environment.

June 2007, National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell gained
White House approval to update a 1981 presidential order on how US spy
agencies operate. Potentially up for review in the highly secretive
overhaul, referred to as Order 12333, is the topic of human
experimentation.

Truth
cannot be bought and sold, only temporarily obfuscated by falsehood.Yet
all falsehood and illusion will themselves ultimately be crucified upon
the cross of the omnipotent Sword of Truth when it pierces the heart in
purification.

There is something within me that might be illusion as it is often
case with young delighted people, but if I would be fortunate to
achieve some of my ideals, it would be on the behalf of the whole of
humanity. Nikola Tesla

`When the Gentiles, who have not the law, do by nature the things
contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto
themselves."-Rom. ii. 14.

I don't know what your destiny will
be, but one thing I do know; the only ones among you who will be really
happy are those who have sought and found how to serve.

"History is nothing but a procession of false absolutes, a series
of temples raised to pretexts, a degradation of the mind before the
improbable."

Men with great knowledge are easily enslaved if
they do nothing to defend their freedom. Knowledge by itself is not
power, but it holds the potential for power if we have the courage to
use it as such, and therein lies our hope for the future. If we act
upon this knowledge, it is an opportunity, not just to know about
history, but actually to change its course.

"Remember when it was give me freedom or give me death? Now it is
save me from death and take my freedom, please." NOTICE : This non
commercial no tender for access or use private research resource
contains unpublished, protected in perpetuity, private work product.
This private non commercial speech and thought is expressly not
intended for by anyone, of any kind, in whole or in part, whatsoever,
to diagnose, treat or cure any disease or illness; mental, physical,
spiritual, political, religious, individually or collectively, or
otherwise. "DaySprings Gatherings Network" unconditionally does NOT
endorse, advocate or promote the use of non-self defense violence or
prejudice of any kind nor paper terrorism nor belligerency against any
government(s) or instrumentality(s) or government officer(s), agent(s),
official(s), representative(s) or any and all men and women of
different religions, beliefs or ethnic backgrounds. We cannot over
emphasize enough that we deplore all acts of terrorism, prejudice,
oppression, suppression, theft or deception (past, present or future)
and further we offer no physical, political or economic threat to any
government, people or religious practice. We make all such non
commercial speech and electronic communication within this resource
available in our private efforts to stimulate well being, good, peace
and harmony for the common good, that includes but is not limited to
spiritual principals, human liberties, as well as to stimulate healthy
and positive environmental, religious, economic, scientific,
historical, social and political ideas, discourse and self inquiry. The
information throughout each page of this resource hereto is provided at
no cost and should only be used by anyone willfully intending to read
this material at their own risk and strict sole enjoyment and benefit
for expressly informational historical research purposes only
(expressly not for commercial or re-sale use, in whole or in part,
whatsoever) that will request the information and all content herein is
expressly not intended nor offered nor presented nor published as
commercial speech or legal, tax or medical advice, in whole or in a
part whatsoever as we are not licensed attorney(s) in at law nor
accountant(s) nor doctor(s) nor be construed as legal, medical or tax
speech, advice or services, in whole or in part, whatsoever. You are
hereby advised that you should seek your own appropriate independent
advice relating to all your private matters by advisors of your choice,
please get a second opinion, third opinion.This is not an offer to sell
or a solicitation to buy any public or private security, book, manual,
workshop, recording, legal, tax, accounting or medical advice, products
or services in whole or in part whatsoever. If you wish to use any part
of this unpublished private work product for purposes of your own that
go beyond your personal enjoyment and benefit in any manner, in whole
or part, whatsoever, ( Limited Use Disclaimer-the downloaded and
private personal research/historical use by anyone constitutes
agreement that all private work product via DaySpring Gatherings
Network Website & Library & DaySpring Gatherings Network Blog
by Gabriel Paul will not be RESOLD, or Republished, in whole or in
part, whatsoever by anyone), you must first obtain prior written
permission from gabriel @ dayspringgatheringscircle.org Unpublished protected work product, In the year of our Lord, Two Thousand and Eight, Anno Domini -- 'The Revolution: A Manifesto'http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0446537519?ie=UTF8&tag=rc020-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0446537519

Ron Paul speaks outside Republican convention

Infowars: Vital Info from Alex Jones

Hello folks, this is Alex Jones. This is just a reminder that tomorrow,
Saturday May 31st 2008, is the Infowars Money Bomb. This is a chance
for you to help me reach millions more in the Infowar by expanding this
operation. All funds will be directed straight towards building a new
studio, purchasing cameras and equipment, expanding office space, and
hiring additional staff to run the operation. Spread the message, and
let everyone know about this moneybomb. Nothing like this has ever been
undertaken by a truly independent media outlet but we can only achieve
our goal with your support! Let’s make history!

Hotel UK Gets You Set For A Stay

In consideration of a stay in the UK
one will more than likely be exploring what UK hotels are available. This is as
easy as Hotel UK. Hotel UK is a premier place to go for hotels in Great Britain. Whether
you will be visiting the most popular destinations of Central London,
Blackpool, Birmingham, Manchester or otherwise and whether you will be flying
in to Luton, Edinburgh Gatwick, Heathrow or Manchester you will definitely be
looking for a great place to sleep, where you can also work, play, explore, dine,
during your visit. In your search for UK hotels you will be provided with
the best of all possible service with the lowest prices as well as promotional
offers. You can book your hotel and more via live chat, via the website or by
calling their London Hotel Hot Line at 020 7127 4349. Navigation in search of UK hotels on
their website can be done from the Home page or via UK By City, UK By
Country and London Hotels tabs. Check out the Google maps features. Browse by
categories whether you are looking for Airport, Upscale, Tourist, Budget hotels
or otherwise and receive helpful information on the cities in which you will be
staying in a helpful Did you know? section. See the photos of the places you
are interested in possibly staying and check the rates. Find yourself a place
to stay and arrange it today!

Former prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi's new book "The
Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder" is not just a particularly good
addition to the ten-foot high stack of rants against Bush's crimes and abuses
of power. It's also an argument that state and local prosecutors have the
necessary jurisdiction to try Bush for murder and for conspiracy to commit
murder, at least once he's out of office. This is not a scheme based on some
harebrained theory that Bush faked the suicide of a former staffer. In fact,
this scheme is based on nothing more than universally accepted facts. Bush
chose to send US troops into Iraq. He did not do so in self-defense or as a
last resort or under an international mandate, but rather went out of his way
to concoct false motives for war and to rush its launching. By sending troops
into war, Bush was knowingly and needlessly but certainly condemning some of
them to death. The Iraqis who killed those soldiers in predictable and legally
justifiable defense of their country fall into the legal category of
"third-party innocent agent." This does not mean they are innocent,
but rather that their actions do nothing to lessen the guilt of George W. Bush
as murderer of those soldiers. Bugliosi calls this the "vicarious
liability rule of conspiracy." Bugliosi explains: "In other words, if
Bush personally killed an American soldier, he would be guilty of murder. Under
the law, he cannot immunize himself from his criminal responsibility by causing
a third party to do the killing. He's still responsible. George Bush cannot sit
safely in his Oval Office in Washington, D.C., while young American soldiers
fighting his war are being blown to pieces by roadside bombs in Iraq, and wash
his hands of all culpability. It's not quite that easy. He could only do this
if he did not take this nation into war under false pretenses. If he did, which
the evidence overwhelmingly shows, he is criminally responsible for the
thousands of American deaths in Iraq." In addition, Bugliosi argues, Bush
could be found guilty of murder under the rule of "aiding and
abetting," because he instigated the killing of American soldiers by
ordering the invasion of Iraq.

Did Bush have "malice aforethought"? Yes,
according to Bugliosi. We convict people of murder for driving 100 mph through
a school zone and hitting a child, or for blowing up a building while unaware
that someone is inside. These are cases where the murderer does not know he is
committing murder but where he is reckless enough to take an unreasonable risk
of doing so. In Bush's case, he absolutely knew that invading Iraq would
involve US casualties, and yet he ordered the invasion, thereby acting with the
intent that American soldiers be killed. Bugliosi strengthens this argument by
pointing out that we often convict people of murder for accidental killings
that occur in the act of committing other felonies: "A robber, for
instance, was convicted of first degree murder under the felony-murder rule
where, as he was leaving the store in which he had robbed the owner, he told
the owner not to say a word or he'd be harmed, and fired into the ceiling to
scare the owner. The shot, after two or three ricochets, pierced the head of
the owner, killing him. In fact, the felony-murder rule applies even where the
defendant is not the killer! There have been cases where the proprietor of the
store fired at a robber, missed him and hit and killed a customer. And the
robber was convicted of first degree murder of the customer."

Bugliosi missed an opportunity here to further strengthen
his case by noting that in the act of ordering the invasion of Iraq, Bush was
committing a number of felonies. When Bush submitted his March 18, 2003, letter
and report to the United States Congress providing reasons for attacking Iraq,
he violated the federal anti-conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C. - 371, which makes
it a felony "to commit any offense against the United States, or to
defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose...";
and The False Statements Accountability Act of 1996, 18 U.S.C. - 1001, which
makes it a felony to issue knowingly and willfully false statements to the
United States Congress. Bush also committed a felony by misappropriating funds
to secretly begin the invasion prior to this date. Bugliosi notes that there is
no statute of limitations for murder. Bush could be prosecuted by any future
federal prosecutor who had the nerve to do so and could do so while keeping his
or her job. But Bugliosi writes that a state attorney general or any district
attorney in any city or county could bring a murder charge against Bush for any
soldiers from that state or county who lost their lives in Iraq. And not just
Bush, but Cheney, Rice, et alia. Bugliosi provides some truly talented
proposals for questioning Bush in court and adds:

"I would be more than happy, if requested, to consult
with any prosecutor who decides to prosecute Bush in preparation of additional
cross-examination questions for him to face on the witness stand. I believe the
cross-examination would be such that they'd have to carry the arrogant son of
privilege off the stand on a stretcher." I know the same offer to assist
stands from former federal prosecutor Elizabeth de la Vega, author of
"United States versus George W. Bush et al." Bugliosi argues that
such trials could only take place once Bush is out of office, but is
uncharacteristically weak in his explanation of why. Bugliosi thinks it was a
mistake to allow the Paula Jones case to take time away from Clinton's duties
as president, but he clearly does not believe taking time away from Bush's
duties as president could possibly harm anyone or anything. And Bugliosi cites
no decisive constitutional or legal basis for preventing a prosecution from
beginning while Bush is still president. The question, in any case, is where we
can find (or elect) one or two or a dozen prosecutors willing to stand up to
the biggest murderer of our age. We need a project to identify the most likely
combinations of prosecutors and gold star families, and work together with
those families to urge prosecution. We are working on this at http://convictbushcheney.org

Why do I call Bush the biggest murderer of our age for a
mere 4,000 murders, not counting his neglect prior to Katrina and 9-11, his
exacerbation of global warming, his opposition to workplace safety standards or
medical research, etc.? I have in mind, of course, the over 1 million Iraqis
who have died as a result of his invasion of Iraq. Bugliosi does not see any
legal case to try Bush for the murders of Iraqis, but he also openly admits
that he cares more about the deaths of Americans. In addition to that
disgusting confession, Bugliosi repeatedly cites the figure 100,000 as the
number of Iraqi deaths, but never indicates where he came up with that number
or how he ignores the fact that every serious study has placed the count above
a million. Bugliosi also repeatedly claims that Bush won the 2004 election, and
expresses his belief that congress members who voted to invade Iraq actually
believed the White House lies about weapons. Bugliosi's is not a perfect book,
but it is a brilliant one, and is as good a one as any to offer to anyone not
yet devoted to putting Bush and Cheney behind bars. Bugliosi concludes his book
with an excellent analysis of what happened on 9-11 and how the media and the
public have responded. His account of how often Bush was warned prior to 9-11
and how little (nothing) he did in response is very well done, but includes at
least one glaring error (at least glaring to those of us privileged to get our
own briefings on these things from Ray McGovern). George Tenet did indeed, as
Bugliosi recounts, tell the 9-11 Commission on April 14, 2004, that he did not
speak with Bush for the whole month of August, 2001. But a CIA spokesperson
called reporters that same evening to claim that Tenet had
"misspoken" and that Tenet had briefed Bush on August 17th and 31st.
In his book, At the Center of the Storm, (2007) Tenet refers to the August 17th
meeting as a follow-up to the August 6th memo on Bin Laden. A White House press
release suggests that Tenet was also in Crawford a week later, on August 24th.
President Bush, addressing a group of visitors to Crawford on August 25, told
them: "George Tenet and I, yesterday, we piled in the new nominees for the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the Vice Chairman and their wives and went right
up the canyon." Bugliosi notes in his book that more evidence will
continue to pile up. His claim, like so many others', is only that the evidence
he has compiled is more than sufficient to put Bush away for life. On that
point, if you read this book, I think you'll agree there can be no doubt
whatsoever.

DAVID SWANSON is a co-founder of After Downing Street, a
writer and activist, and the Washington Director of Democrats.com. He is a
board member of Progressive Democrats of America, and serves on the Executive
Council of the Washington-Baltimore Newspaper Guild, TNG-CWA. He has worked as
a newspaper reporter and as a communications director, with jobs including
Press Secretary for Dennis Kucinich's 2004 presidential campaign, Media
Coordinator for the International Labor Communications Association, and three
years as Communications Coordinator for ACORN, the Association of Community
Organizations for Reform Now. Swanson obtained a Master's degree in philosophy
from the University of Virginia in 1997.